Does Campbell end the 'Cover 2' excuse?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

You ask why can't Brunell be better than Brady, Manning, Grossman, Palmer, Pennington, Romo, Vick, and Hasselbeck? I can't believe you are actually asking that. I pray that you are not implying that he is better than them.

Either you are: (1) arguing that Brunell is better than those QBs; or (2) you concede that there is something wrong with those stats. So which is it?

Neither. I think he's better than Grossman and Vick...and Romo its far far too early to tell.

I will say this, those stats are based on one season. So is Brunell better than any of those remaining guys? Not even close. Has he done his job this season as well as them to this point? Most accounts say yes.

There are always extra reasoning that go along with statistics.

Anyway, Brunell is better in QB rating than most of those guys, so at what point do we discredit all evidence and bicker about nothing? I've said many times that QB rating is a flawed stat, but I'm serious now, when you say that Tom Brady is having a better season than Brunell, what are you basing that on? Record alone? Considering he's one of 53 guys on the Pats, that's pretty weak. Or are you basing it on what you hear from talking heads around the league, and what you accept without challenging.

Don't get me wrong, I also believe Brady is better than Brunell. But this season, Brady isn't as good as he normally is, and Brunell is better than his career average.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Don't get me wrong, I also believe Brady is better than Brunell. But this season, Brady isn't as good as he normally is, and Brunell is better.

Just for clarity, are you saying Brunell was a better QB this year than Brady is right now?

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Neither. I think he's better than Grossman and Vick...and Romo its far far too early to tell.

I will say this, those stats are based on one season. So is Brunell better than any of those remaining guys? Not even close. Has he done his job this season as well as them to this point? Most accounts say yes.

Most accounts say Brunell has done as good of a job as those other QBs? I'm not sure what other "accounts" you're referring to.

I supplement statistically analyses with my eyes, and I've seen enough games of all of those QBs to know that Brunell has not been doing a good job and I think the overwhelming majority of other eyes concur.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Either way, from a moderator on the warpath, I have come to expect a more open mind.

Whatever.

SGG has had an extremely open mind with you. He does with everyone in fact.

Look, I agree with you that Brunell isn't doing as poorly as most think. And I think it's misleading to say he doesn't spread the ball around. Now while I think long-term JC will be a great QB I don't expect a sudden explosion of points right away. However, I hope I'm dead wrong. I hope Campbell is a huge difference and we start getting convincing Ws. I think a lot of other Brunell supporters feel the same way, because above all they are Redskins fans.

But I think it's becoming increasingly clear that wins don't seem to matter to you. It's like you're personally offended by the change at QB and want nothing more than to be proven right. it's like you're hoping Campbell plays poorly and we lose so you can come back with more DPAR, DVOA, DVDA, DUMB stats to say "I told you so"

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

SGG has had an extremely open mind with you. He does with everyone in fact.

Look, I agree with you that Brunell isn't doing as poorly as most think. And I think it's misleading to say he doesn't spread the ball around. Now while I think long-term JC will be a great QB I don't expect a sudden explosion of points right away. However, I hope I'm dead wrong. I hope Campbell is a huge difference and we start getting convincing Ws. I think a lot of other Brunell supporters feel the same way, because above all they are Redskins fans.

But I think it's becoming increasingly clear that wins don't seem to matter to you. It's like you're personally offended by the change at QB and want nothing more than to be proven right. it's like you're hoping Campbell plays poorly and we lose so you can come back with more DPAR, DVOA, DVDA, DUMB stats to say "I told you so"

I don't know why you'd say that wins don't matter to me. I think you have me completely wrong. I'm trying to bring up intelligent discussion about the QB conundrum. Food for thought if you will.

SGG has been cool about the whole QB debate, maybe a tad reactionary (every game his position on Brunell seemed to change), but nothing if not fair. So I've said this to him already, but I was calling out him for making a close minded (and out of character) post, NOT for being a close minded person. He, in general, is one of the more open minded members on this fourm, and to clarify, I think he's a great moderator.

Why would you say that I hope Campbell plays poorly? I'll defend him too if he gets unjustly attacked. I'm on record saying that. I believe, due to readings i've made, that Jason Campbell will grow to be a great NFL QB. But grow is the key term.

The point of metrics like DVOA and DPAR is not to say "I told you so." It's to try to assess performance based on eliminating factors that those players can't control. I don't know what is so horrible about that. I'm not the I told you so kind of person...never have been. When the team is losing, tensions are high. If we were as good as we were supposed to be, this would not be an issue. But is it a really horrible thing if we were to question things before accepting them as fact. I personally think not.

If anyone does, it could be difficult to get along with me over the rest of the season. I'll apoligize in advance right here.

If anyone has something to say to me, feel free to PM me, I'm here daily.

No hard feelings.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

SGG has been cool about the whole QB debate, maybe a tad reactionary (every game his position on Brunell seemed to change), but nothing if not fair. So I've said this to him already, but I was calling out him for making a close minded (and out of character) post, NOT for being a close minded person. He, in general, is one of the more open minded members on this fourm, and to clarify, I think he's a great moderator

Not to be a smart ass, but I don't think you actually mean that I am "reactionary" (an ultra right-winger who hates liberals). If you mean that I've been somewhat inconsistent on Brunell (aka a "flip-flopper"), I must clarify my position because I think I've been consistent, not dogmatic.

I have had a major problem with Brunell since the start of the season (hence my posts in these threads). That said, I: (1) am willing to recognize that he's done good things for this organization (hence my "thanks Mark Brunell" thread); and (2) think he's played a few good games this season (hence my "give props to Mark Brunell" thread).

I don't think I'm being inconsistent by calling for Brunell's benching, but recognizing that he is not Adolf Hitler re-born (as I think some posters are close to doing) and that he's done good things for us and occasionally plays a good game. I think that's just being fair to the guy. I'm not going to be unwilling to admit it when he plays well. But just because he plays well one week and I recognize it, I don't think I've abandoned my general position that he is sub-par.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Either way, from a moderator on the warpath, I have come to expect a more open mind.

Whatever.

First, I've had a very open mind. Like TAFKAS, I have consistently said that Brunell isn't as bad as people think. I have also said that he's not nearly as good as you claim. You may or may not recall that I started a thread praising Brunell after the Dallas game, but I did. I have also taken issue with people who have claimed that Brunell is worse than Andrew Walter, etc. So, ironically enough, I cannot understand why you claim that I do not have an open mind.

Second, I have repeatedly said that you are entitled to your opinion and that I respect that you try to back up your arguments. I also, however, have repeatedly said that I disagree with you. Those two notions are not irreconciliable.

Third, I do take serious issue with the kinds of stats you have cited. You said that they are respected, but I have yet to be proven that. Who else cites those stats? They come from some obscure website. Moreover, I disagree with their rankings of QBs based on some obscure formula. Even you seem to disagree with some of the rankings. So, I have no idea how you can challenge my refusal to accept such stats when you do not completely accept them either.

Fourth, it seems to me that you are intensely annoyed with people who bash Brunell and are, therefore, totally determined to defend Brunell at every turn. I understand and agree with your contention that he's not as bad as people make him out to be. But I disagree with how you appear to refuse to concede that anything is wrong with Brunell.

Finally, I've repeatedly stated that you are a valued member of thewarpath. So, please don't take my disagreements with you personally.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

Third, I do take serious issue with the kinds of stats you have cited. You said that they are respected, but I have yet to be proven that. Who else cites those stats? They come from some obscure website. Moreover, I disagree with their rankings of QBs based on some obscure formula. Even you seem to disagree with some of the rankings. So, I have no idea how you can challenge my refusal to accept such stats when you do not completely accept them either.

Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of Pro Football Prospectus. It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of Pro Football Prospectus. It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.

I stand corrected, I was wrong that the stats came from some obscure website. I nevertheless disagree with its QB rankings.

[EternalEnigma21]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Football Outsiders' DVOA rankings double as the power rankings on FOXSports.com. At least they used to before this season, but they are still posted on FOXSports.com.

The same authors of the site are also the authors of Pro Football Prospectus. It's a statistical evidence book that has drawn rave reviews from trustworthy experts like Ron Jaworski, and is I believe it to be the highest selling football book (not sure if thats by $ or by copies sold).

But if that doesn't make them important, I don't know what does.

never before have I met anyone with such conviction... I'll give you that... but thats about it. I think the pope would have sex with marilyn manson before you'd admit that brunell isnt a good quarterback.

stats do not make a good qb. results make a good qb. MB has not been a good QB since he's been here. He's been an excellent field general and game manager... but hes not a playmaker, (i know i know the first dallas game last year...) which is something you NEED in a good QB.

Low risk is great, and turnovers can kill you, but if youre not winning anyway, fucking chuck the ball dumbass! Maybe you save yourself a punt....

Did you actually watch the games, or do you just look at a spreadsheet and judge performances?


Gtripp, you are turning me into a brunell hater, and I had some respect for the guy. I can't turn away from this debacle of a thread and every time I hear hes the 10th best QB in the league I want to choke something.

I keep getting pissed off and I shouldn't. You have the right to believe whatever you want and voice your opinion and I'm damn proud to be a part of a forum and a country that allows it.

I get the feeling, though, that you look at these responses everyday and laugh at all the people taking you seriously... and I would respect that position much more than the one you're taking....

please tell me its true!

[TheMalcolmConnection]

He's better than Grossman. That's all I can say.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Really, I think it all comes down to wins and losses. We can look at a Donovan McNabb and see, "Wow, he's the top passing QB in the league." But then you have to look at the percentage of times the Eagles pass versus when they run.

You can look at a Mark Brunell and see that while his passer rating is stellar, his touchdowns are not. You can also look at his average yards per pass.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Really, I think it all comes down to wins and losses. We can look at a Donovan McNabb and see, "Wow, he's the top passing QB in the league." But then you have to look at the percentage of times the Eagles pass versus when they run.

You can look at a Mark Brunell and see that while his passer rating is stellar, his touchdowns are not. You can also look at his average yards per pass.

Very true. In today's day and age if you say "x player is good" there's probably something to prove him wrong. That's why I like to break it down play by play, and that's the key to FO's work, which is why I trust them. Every play is considered. Not the game totals. Few of us have the time for that, but isn't that the way it should be?

[TheMalcolmConnection]

It almost even comes down to gut feeling. Like I can watch Big Ben play all day and in the end, he's not the most accurate passer, hell, he's even won a Super Bowl. He is the product of a great (not-so-great anymore) passing game and using that to set up the pass. In the end, is he still a good QB? Sure, because he makes the plays that leads his team to wins.

Statistically Brunell blew Ben out of the water, but is Brunell right for the system and does he make the plays that let the team win? No. Philip Rivers is another example. While fundamentally, he's better than Ben, he too is the result of an elite back making his job easier.

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Ah. And just to play devil's advocate, we could also say that after the dinks and dunks, the receivers weren't making plays after the catch (I disagree, just wanted to throw that out there.).